In "soft" sciences like sociology, it's much more difficult to detect
manipulation of research, than in "hard" sciences like physics. Soft
science researchers who strive for objectivity deserve an extra
measure of respect. Sadly, far too many researchers are more
concerned with pushing an agenda than with objectivity. These same
problems are not unknown in the world of journalism.
Since the soft sciences and the media have a powerful influence on
social policies in this country, this affects every family and every individual.

is about the broken "science" that's being used
to create law and drive social policy.

For
thirty years now, researchers have known that wives kick, punch,
stab, or shoot their husbands about as often as husbands kick, punch,
stab, or shoot their wives. But federal law ignores the facts and
instead uses the power of the purse to get states to impose
Kafkaesque policies that punish victimized men and reward violent
women.

Back
in 1975, the First National Family Violence Survey turned up results
that surprised even the sociologists conducting the survey. Wives
attack husbands about as often as husbands attack wives. And wives
attack first about as often as husbands attack first, which is strong
evidence that women's assaults on men can't be explained away simply
as self-defense.1
But battered women's advocates were intent on portraying domestic
violence as something only men do and only women suffer from. So
they'd conveniently leave out the part about women's assaults on men
whenever they cited the study's results.2

Susan
R. Paisner is a criminologist and longtime advocate for abused women
and men. She recalls being stunned by the hostile attitudes toward
male victims that she encountered at one of the nation's first
conferences on domestic violence. She naively thought that "we
were all there to do good -- for all who needed it." Yet when
she mentioned having read a brief newspaper article about male
victims, many of the other women at the conference turned on her,
saying, "This is OUR issue, OUR cause. If men are battered,
then let other MEN do something for them."3

The
Second National Family Violence Survey was conducted ten years after
the first. Contrary to advocates' claims of an epidemic of wife
abuse, violence toward women had declined. But violence toward men
by women had not changed since the first survey.4

When
battered women's advocates lobbied Congress, they quoted only the
part of the results that suited their agenda. And so, in spite of
longstanding knowledge among researchers about the existence of
significant numbers of abusive women and victimized men, Congress
enacted legislation in 1994 that addressed only part of the problem.
Rather than passing an inclusive Family Violence Act, they enacted a
Violence Against Women Act.

VAWA
provided billions of dollars for organizations whose primary purpose
is helping abused women, but nothing whatsoever for organizations to
help abused men. The Violence Against Women Office, which
administers VAWA, states that the law prohibits funding of programs
that focus on male victims.5
At least one state agency that distributes VAWA funds explicitly
lists "Programs that focus on children and/or men" under
"Ineligible Activities" on their application form.6

Even
after receiving $5.1 billion under the past two VAWA bills, battered
women's advocates still argue that there's too little money, and
therefore the government should allocate no funding whatsoever for
organizations whose primary purpose is to help the 835,000 men the
U.S. Dept. of Justice estimates are assaulted by their partner
annually.7
Yet somehow there's enough money in the current $4.2 billion VAWA
reauthorization bill to make special provisions for an estimated
16,304 Native Americans,8
but of course, only if those Native Americans are female. No males
need apply.

Lacks safeguards against false
allegations of domestic violence, thus encouraging the unscrupulous
to use false allegations during divorce proceedings to separate
children and fathers.

Blurs the distinction between
violent crime and a verbal argument.

Allows restraining orders based
on a woman's word; no proof required.

Encourages mandatory reporting,
mandatory arrest, and "no-drop" prosecutions, policies
which even the Feminist Majority Foundation says often end up
harming families.10

Pre-empts state partner assault
laws and the federal Victims of Crime Act. Spends $1 billion a year
duplicating existing programs.

Funds trainings that teach
judges to violate the Constitution. In one such training, judges
were instructed: "
Your job is not to become concerned about
all the constitutional rights of the man that you're violating as
you grant a restraining order. Thrown him out on the street, give
him the clothes on his back and tell him, 'See ya' around.'
"11

Funds treatment programs based
on ideology, not science.

Represents an overreaching of
federal power.

Corrupts family violence
research. VAWA-funded researchers often seek to bias the outcome of
their research by interviewing only women, slanting the wording of
questions, asking only questions that will produce the desired
answer, or by selectively reporting research findings.12

Funds
educational programs that consistently depict men as perpetrators
and women as victims of domestic violence.

VAWA
should have treated all people equally when it was first enacted.
Instead, VAWA tramples on persons' basic human rights while ignoring
what scientific researchers have known for three decades. Our
elected officials have a responsibility to make sure VAWA helps all
victims of domestic violence.

5
Rejection letter from Delaware Domestic Violence Coordinating
Council to Forum for Equity and Fairness in Family Issues, October
9, 2002,
http://www.menshealthnetwork.org/library/VAWArejectDel1002.pdf
quoting documentation provided by the Violence Against Women Office
which says, "states must fund only programs that focus on
violence against women".

7
National Institute of Justice, Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice, "Prevalence, Incidence,
and Consequences of Violence Against Women: Findings From the
National Violence Against Women Survey," p. 7
(http://www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles/172837.pdf)